


Ratings: Worksafe, Standard, Mature, Explicit

by Elf (Elfwreck)



Series: Fic Ratings [2]
Category: No Fandom
Genre: Gen, Meta, Nonfiction, fic ratings
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2008-06-24
Updated: 2008-06-24
Packaged: 2021-02-28 23:54:14
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 1,045
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/23145760
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Elfwreck/pseuds/Elf
Summary: I've been considering how to rate fic (and art, vid & whatever) content. I like the idea of four ratings, which is what most sites use, and the options of individual warnings in addition to the ratings.
Series: Fic Ratings [2]
Series URL: https://archiveofourown.org/series/1663780
Collections: March Meta Matters Challenge





	Ratings: Worksafe, Standard, Mature, Explicit

I've ranted about [the evils of movie ratings for fic](http://elfwreck.insanejournal.com/162465.html) in the past. Aside from the psychosis that invades the MPAA so that eviscerations onscreen are PG, female nipples are R, and a penis is an automatic NC-17 (because of course nobody under 18 has seen one before, right?), I don't like rating the _reader_ rather than the content. I want fics (and arts and vids) rated by what's inside them, not by who's expected to find that most appealing.

The most common non-MPAA ratings suggested are age-based, which has several problems. Rating a story "teen" can be taken to mean "intended readers are teenagers; so this is probably not interesting to anyone over 21," rather than "intended readers should be at least 14 years of age." And who's deciding what's appropriate for a 14-year-old to read? Whose standards are being used? The author's? The host site's? Certainly not mine; I know what I was reading at 14, and a lot of it's not allowed at ff.net. Is anyone enforcing those ratings? Or is "15-and-up" fic being read by 12-year-olds, and we're all pretending that labeling it "15+" is somehow "protecting" those kids who are honest enough to stay away from stuff labeled Too Old For You? 

Also, in some circles, it creates a stigma for writers & readers of less-explicit content; in others, because it's assumed that "adult" means "explicit sexual content," rather than "complex and mature themes," readers can be disappointed by stories rated "adult" that don't contain what they want to read. (Death, insanity, and torture are all potential themes in adult non-sexual stories.) And readers who would like complex or dark themes—but not sex—have trouble finding those stories.

So I've been considering how to rate fic (and art, vid & whatever) content. I like the idea of four ratings, which is what most sites use, and the options of individual warnings in addition to the ratings. (Ratings are the overall "level;" warnings are for specific contents—like sexual activity, character death, or incest, which could be included in any rating level.) 

My Four Content Ratings: 

  1. **WORKSAFE** : Least extreme/objectionable; suitable for any readers; no triggery, offensive, or overly-complicated content. Completely worksafe; could be printed on business brochures or run in newspapers if the topic were appropriate.  
( _Examples_ : Children's books, corporate art; newspaper articles; Emily Dickenson's poetry. )  
FICNOTES: content of this type almost never includes warnings. Even if it deals with triggery content, it's so abstract as to be unoffensive except to the most sensitive readers. 
  2. **STANDARD** : Can contain complex themes or references to triggery content, but not details thereof; some readers will want to avoid this; some parents will refuse to allow their children access, but usually agree that it's a matter of their personal choice. May include swear words or other offensive-but-common content. Some employers might object.  
( _Examples_ : Women-in-bikini artwork, tasteful nudes like David, scripts to most sitcoms are also here. Most books. Much humor goes here, even if it deals with topics that would otherwise be considered "Mature." Most song lyrics. Shakespeare's poetry. Note: most of this content is, in fact, "worksafe;" it just wouldn't be used as corporate content by most businesses.)  
FICNOTES: sometimes contains warnings, if it touches on common "squicky" topics like incest, rape, underage sex, or death. 
  3. **MATURE** : Objectionable to some people; squick/trigger content; substantial numbers parents prefer kids not exposed to this. May include extensive swearing. Might not be legal for radio broadcast. Readers/viewers expected to understand complex themes and accept that this content makes some people uncomfortable.  
( _Examples_ : Harlequin romances, supermarket-counter horror novels, _I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings_ , many L&O episodes, much of Tom of Finland's art. "Risqué" or bawdy song lyrics. Ginsberg's poetry.)  
FICNOTES: Usually contains warnings, especially if it deals with kinky sex, violence, or intensely unpleasant or scary situations. 
  4. **EXPLICIT** : Graphic content that many people find objectionable; many believe all children shouldn't have access to this; some of this, in picture form, is legally restricted from children. This content severely upsets some people.  
( _Examples_ : Some of Crowley's poetry. Some "bodice-ripper" novels. Reservoir Dogs. Sex manuals & instruction books. Many types of netsuke. _Femalia_. _A Clockwork Orange_ , the book—movie would be Mature.)  
FICNOTES: Almost always has warnings, even if only for "explicit sex." Warnings should be carefully heeded by anyone with triggers. 



So. **Ratings 1-4, Worksafe, Standard, Mature, Explicit or WSME**.  
I'm not thrilled with the labels, especially the first two, but I couldn't figure out any others that gave a sense of gradual increase, indicated content rather than recipient, and didn't stigmatize the content one way or the other. (I could've said "innocuous" rather than "worksafe," but I don't want the "lowest" rating to imply "doesn't contain as much depth as other ratings." I wanted to acknowledge that materials at any rating can be intense and meaningful.)

I'm collecting lists of stuff—books, movies, art, whatever—rated this way. Got a nice little chart on my hard drive, but I get too caught up in possibilities and trying to balance the lists out, when I know that really, a lot more stuff is going to be S and M than anything else. (Heh. Yeah, there's a lot of unacknowledged S&M in the world.) I plan on putting together a poll sometime soon, and seeing how other people would rate various stories, artworks and books.

Not intended to be absolute or definitive; this is how I'd sort these. Some are borderline, and someone else might nudge them into a different column. Certainly, I welcome examples & discussion, or claims that I've got some parts just wrong.  
**Elf's Table O Ratings** , version 0.9 

| **Worksafe** | **Standard** | **Mature** | **Explicit**  
---|---|---|---|---  
Sci-Fi Authors | Asimov | Clarke | Heinlein (later works) | Richard Morgan  
Vampire stories | Bunnicula | I Am Legend | Interview With The Vampire | Incubus Dreams  
Sex/ Reproduction | N/A | Where Did I Come From? | Our Bodies,Ourselves | The Joy of Sex  
Animation | Naruto  
Scooby Doo  
Powerpuff Girls | Ranma 1/2  
Simpsons  
Daria | Vampire Hunter D  
Aeon Flux  
Beavis and Butthead | Urotsukidoji  
South Park  
Drawn Together  
Bible | Psalm 23 | Genesis 23 | Luke 23 | Ezekiel 23  
  
**ETA** for [](http://asylums.insanejournal.com/metafandom/profile)[**metafandom**](http://community.livejournal.com/metafandom/) ers: remember, you can use OpenID to reply with your LJ identity--and that way, you get email notifications of replies left to your comments.

**Author's Note:**

> Originally posted at <http://asylums.insanejournal.com/metametameta/6928.html> where there are comments.


End file.
